Науковий вісник НГУ

Comparative analysis of public management models

• 
• 

User Rating:  / 0

PoorBest 

Details

Category: Content №4 2021

Last Updated on 23 August 2021

Published on 30 November -0001

Hits: 6171

Authors:

K.Ingram, orcid.org/0000-0001-9136-1896, Vilniaus Kolegija, University of Applied Sciences, Vilnius, the Republic of Lithuania, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

V.Nitsenko, orcid.org/0000-0002-2185-0341, SCIRE Foundation, Warsaw, the Republic of Poland, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

повний текст / full article

Naukovyi Visnyk Natsionalnoho Hirnychoho Universytetu. 2021, (4): 122 - 127

https://doi.org/10.33271/nvngu/2021-4/122

Abstract:

Purpose. Comparative assessment on the relevance of paradigms that lead to the development of new public administration models.

Methodology. A comparative analysis was conducted in the research in order to provide a comprehensive understanding, from occupational and academic viewpoints, on the existing public administration models, which are traditional public administration, new public management and new public governance, spatial features which contribute to new paradigmatic exemplars and viewpoints.

Findings. There are some important aspects in the understanding of paradigms in public administration models. To that extent the overall framework of public administration models are paradigms that constantly shift when a crisis occurs. This demonstrates that the new developed public administration models will not always fit in one paradigm, and can exist in a hybrid state where various characteristics of other paradigms overlap the other. Identifying these characteristics aids in determining the applicability of current models to regulating governance and management of public sector entities and functions as well as its designation.

Originality. Previous research indicates that numerous attempts in understanding and developing a systematic approach to the order of public administration have been made. To date, the development of public administration as a discipline is perceived as a succession of overlapping paradigms. Notwithstanding this, public administration still remains the single most important aspect of bureaucracies in the world. With the government deciding on all aspects of civil society in capitalist, socialist and democratic states the objectives of public administration are termed to be in a continuous state of paradigm shift. Paradigms provide solutions and determine whether areas of a particular phenomenon are problematic and many public administrative practitioners have often adopted the paradigmatic assumptions that politicians, officials, and citizens are motivated by self-interest, and will perceive the development in public administration in this light.

Practical value. The work provides an interpretation on the functions and prospects of public administration as a discipline that lead to the development and transition from traditional public administration (TPA) to new public management (NPM), then new public governance (NPG) and further on to other post-new public management models.

Keywords: public administration, traditional public administration, new public management, new public governance, paradigm

References.

1. Aderibigbe, A.M., & Oluwafemi, J. (2014). Towards A Theoretical Definition of Public Administration. IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSR-JBM), 16(3), 65-70. https://doi.org/10.9790/487X-16356570.

2. Runya, X., Sun, Q., & Si, W. (2015). The Third Wave of Public Administration: The New Public Governance. Canadian Social Science, 11(7), 11-21. https://doi.org/10.3968/7354.

3. Snellen, I.M. (2014). Foundations of Public Administration: An Essay in Tis Paradigms. The Hague: Eleven International Publishing. Retrieved from https://www.bookdepository.com/Foundations-Public-Administration-I-Th-M-Snellen/9789462361089.

4. Rozin, V. (2021). From Engineering and Technological Process to Post-Cultural Technology. Future Human Image, 15, 99-109. https://doi.org/10.29202/fhi/15/9.

5. Ryu, S. (2016). Modeling Public Management: Current and Future Research. Public Organization Review, 16, 77-94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-014-0297-4.

6. Baharun, R., Jing Mi, T., Streimikiene, D., Mardani, A., Shakeel,J., & Nitsenko, V. (2019). Innovation in healthcare performance among private brands healthcare services in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 16(5), 151-172. https://doi.org/10.12700/APH.16.5.2019.5.9.

7. Ingrams, A., Piotrowski, S., & Berliner, D. (2020). Learning from Our Mistakes: Public Management Reform and the Hope of Open Government. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 3(4), 257-272. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvaa001.

8. Kalinichenko, A., Havrysh, V., & Nitsenko, V. (2019). Alternative Vehicle Fuel Management: Impact on Energy Security Indicators. In Krakowiak-Bal, A., & Vaverkova M. (Eds.) (2019). Infrastructure and Environment, (pp. 367-374). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org /10.1007/978-3-030-16542-0_45.

9. Syomych, M. (2019). Features of modern models of public administration. Public Administration Aspects, 7(4), 44-52. https://doi.org/10.15421/151922.

10. El-Ghalayini, Y. (2016). New Public Management: An Assessment of Impact and the Influence on Public Administration. Public Policy and Administration Research, 6(12), 18-22.

11. Latysheva, O., Rovenska, V., Smyrnova, I., Nitsenko, V., Balezentis, T., & Streimikiene, D. (2020). Management of the sustainable development of machine-building enterprises: a sustainable development space approach. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 34(1), 328-342. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-12-2019-0419.

12. Chand, A., & Naidu, S. (2020). New Public Management Model and Performance Appraisal System. In Farazmand A. (Ed.) (2020). Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_4031-1.

13. Mozgin, W. (2020). An Anthropocentric Perspective in Posthumanist and Transhumanist Discourse. Philosophy and Cosmology, 25, 108-117. https://doi.org/10.29202/phil-cosm/25/9.

14. Sokiran, M. (2020). Theoretical Approaches to the Definition of Critical Space Infrastructure. Advanced Space Law, 6, 54-63. https://doi.org/10.29202/asl/6/6.

15. Tang, W., & Qiu, X. (2020). Construction of Law-based Government in the Context of Counteraction to COVID-19. Ukrainian Policymaker, 6, 74-84. https://doi.org/10.29202/up/6/8.

17. Lampropoulou, M., & Oikonomou, G. (2018). Theoretical models of public administration and patterns of state reform in Greece. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 84(1), 101-121. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852315611219.

17. Krukowski, K., & Siemiski, M. (2018). New public management in organisations introducing agricultural policies in Poland. Management Theory and Studies for Rural Business and Infrastructure Development, 40(2), 206-215. https://doi.org/10.15544/mts.2018.20.

• < Prev
• Next >